PDA

View Full Version : A brief interlude with the HPX300



Noel Evans
04-02-2009, 06:54 AM
Went to the 302(300) launch locally and got some hands on.

Video below - and as much as I hate when I see this on other threads, sadly I have to, so sincere apologies. I have a caveat. That is I set the scene file to fairly well 0 on everything, thats fine, but I missed an important detail. The vertical detail frequency. As I was shooting progressive, this should have been set to thick and I was on thin, so I got some rough edges and slight steps. It wasnt til I popped the cam back on the tripod, pulled my p2 card out, connected the SDI that I saw it on the monitor and thought damn. I changed to thick and again thought damn. SO again, apologies. But anyway on and up.

So to reiterate - I shot, 1080/25pn, cinelike D - everything else at 0. It will be the users who will quickly report where best results can be had in diff. situations, so I went with basic.

So heres what I thought. And you can take from it what you will. I can only tell you what I saw. I may skip over some points that are common knowledge such as professional components like mechanical ND, waveform etc.

CAMERA

Body design is very sleek. Much nicer than I expected even though I have seen many pics prior to today. Hope Pana keeps this look.

Camera is light! You can hold the whole thing by the lens grip. Yeah I did it. You could carry this thing on your shoulder much longer than a 500. And I found the overall balance very good.

REAL LENS!!!! (Well not that other fixed lens cams dont use a real lens, if it wasnt real how would they operate? But I think you get the meaning).

EVF - very crisp. Very easy to get focus. Which brings me to the focus bar. Much easier in general to use and read than a histogram type focus assist.

LCD - Best LCD I have seen on a Panasonic camera. Same point as EVF, you can get focus very easily, but keeping in mind this camera with its inherent DOF characteristics (1/3"chip).

Control layout, very similar to other Pana shoulder mount cams, and as I am used to that, I liked the set up.

P2 card inserts. - Much better location, on the left side of the cam with all the controls.
You couldnt fit much more than the two slots it has there. Two slots enough? Upto the individual to decide that dependent on their workflow.

Well those were the standouts.

IMAGE

So, I didnt do anything special. My areas of concern for the clips I shot where, how it handle some clipping, how it handled some ugly high conrast backgrounds, how it performed in lowlight, how it went with quick pans.

So, the clips I shot reflect what I was personally looking at.

Highlights - actually this one surprised me a little. I thought it did a pretty good job rolling them off. Nothing I saw that came up ugly like you would see on the original HVX200 for example. (Check the clip)

High contrast backgrounds - Hmmm, today was an ugly day here. Cloudy, rain. White high contrast clouds, good for the test I wanted. SO the couple of shots I did surprised me - nothing terrible showed up and I really expected it to. (see palm leaves and top of building shot on clip)

Lowlight - Again pretty good, we are talking a 1/3"chip here and I got decent results in very dark places. Its no where near the 500 in this respect, but neither is an EX1 and you wouldnt expect them to be either. (Check the clip)

Skew - With a reasonably paced pan you can negate it fairly well, with a faster pan, wasnt so good and esp. telephoto - but you know the reasons behind that. 25pn showed quite a bit on the long end. (Check the clip).

Colour - POW. Great colour rendition.

DRS - Well its not like on the 3000 :P but would you expect the same on a 1/3" chip camera costing a shi* load less? Still a neat function. Didnt record any shots using DRS, but played with it for a good 5 minutes.

OVERALL - Its a 1/3" chip camera. And as such performs admirably. Its no 200a, 170, 150 - it is better because of the things I mentioned above and being the latest Panasonic camera on the market, you would expect a step forward from those. CCD v 3MOS? Not convinced entirely myself. But its an undeniably much sharper unit in a neat package.

Would I buy one? If I had the need I would. I think the 300 would perform exceptionally well shooting green screen, esp. over SDI, due to the resolution, controlled lighting environment and the fact its 10bit 4:2:2. And if I was doing it weekly and had a studio, I most def. would grab one for that purpose alone.

At the end of the day, I learnt a while back that resolution is not the most important factor in an images overall aesthetic. But I agree with the reasoning of Panasonic, as to many it is a defining factor. Pixel counters (term stolen from someone else) will love this camera.

Choose a cam any cam, theres always going to be a choice you need to make - do I take A or B.

Oh and as a side note. There was a rep from Fujinon there today, and a point raised was light loss due to using a 1/2" to 1/3" OR 2/3" to 1/3" lens adapter. The answer wasnt NO, but was that there would be a miniscule difference.

OK so heres the clip(remember my caveat above) and there are two clips where you can see me gaining it up - the first one goes 0db - 6db - 12db - 24db, the second is 0 - 6 - 12.

http://www.scarlet-films.com/HPX/300test.mov

Link temporarily down. Has killed my bandwidth usage on my site

Big Brother
04-02-2009, 08:22 AM
cant find the host - The download not happening.

David Saraceno
04-02-2009, 11:51 AM
1.0.5 to 1.0.6 - look at the post that comes into view.

Noel Evans
04-02-2009, 03:36 PM
cant find the host - The download not happening.

Its def. up as I type this.

Big Brother
04-02-2009, 10:02 PM
i cant even get to open your site ... PLs check if any things of any issue

Noel Evans
04-02-2009, 10:20 PM
Works fine. Please note the file does not have hinted streaming - you will need to download. Doing this to files that arent displayed on my website as it encourages people to actually download it.

For WIN - right click "save target as"

For MAC - Control click "download linked file as" or using NORMAL mouse right click and "download linked file as"

alexdias
04-02-2009, 10:29 PM
It took a while to load but it's working.

I'll save my impressions for next week when I'll have one on hands.
But the skew on Noel's sample is pretty bad...

Noel Evans
04-03-2009, 12:59 AM
But the skew on Noel's sample is pretty bad...

I agree totally. But its no different to an EX IMO on the long end of the lens as this was.

Please keep in mind one simple fact, no Im not defending the 300 but, the EX lens is 14x and the 300 lens is 17 times.

Skew is always worse on the long end, the Pana has more long end. Simple equation.

And Ill say it plain and simple, if you dont like skew then a 3mos or cmos camera isnt for you. If you want full raster 1080 and can deal with skew then its gold.

alexdias
04-03-2009, 09:22 AM
Yeah, the longer end on the 300 would increase the skew in comparison to the EX.

I know don't like the skew. I have been using CMOS cameras for a while now and I always have to deal with the issues cause by it. Most times I was able to negotiated, others don't. So it's a problem for me.
But, nowadays it's all about compromising. The 300 has some excellent features over the EXs, the 170 or any other cost comparable camera out there. Size, weight, ergonomics, full raster, 10 bit, i-frame, etc... So, I curious and, naively, hopeful :)

Tim Naylor
04-03-2009, 11:46 AM
Went to the 302(300) launch locally and got some hands on.

Oh and as a side note. There was a rep from Fujinon there today, and a point raised was light loss due to using a 1/2" to 1/3" OR 2/3" to 1/3" lens adapter. The answer wasnt NO, but was that there would be a miniscule difference.

http://www.scarlet-films.com/HPX/300test.mov

The difference in area between 1/2 chip and 1/3 chip is huge. More than twice the total area (1.4 to .6). That has a profound effect on sensitivity and noise issues. To say it has a miniscule effect is a bit of an understatement. With RED camera trying to stuff 4k into super 35 chip and Phantom just going with with 2k into super 35 has vastly different qualities in terms of noise/ASA.

dolph2000
04-04-2009, 10:01 AM
Noel,
is there any way you would choose a 300 over a 500 exept for maybe the greenscreen use you mentioned.

Noel Evans
04-05-2009, 05:22 PM
The difference in area between 1/2 chip and 1/3 chip is huge. More than twice the total area (1.4 to .6). That has a profound effect on sensitivity and noise issues. To say it has a miniscule effect is a bit of an understatement. With RED camera trying to stuff 4k into super 35 chip and Phantom just going with with 2k into super 35 has vastly different qualities in terms of noise/ASA.

He gave a detailed explanation that was a little technically advanced for me to catch everything, but I wouldnt call either way and wait for real world results.

Noel Evans
04-05-2009, 10:04 PM
Noel,
is there any way you would choose a 300 over a 500 exept for maybe the greenscreen use you mentioned.

No, If I were to be looking at a purchase today, Id still get the 500.

500 has better dynamic range, better than the 300, EX3 and other HD options that I would put in the short list. The other is 2/3 DOF. Way more control than, again, the others that would be in my short list.

These two things matter to me much more than a bit more res at this point in time with the current state of affairs.

Sure Id love more res and Id love AVCIntra, and Id love the weight of the 300 as a daily proposition. But I think the answer to my needs lays in a 2/3" chip for now.

alpi69
04-06-2009, 11:00 AM
Hey Noel I totally agree. I trtied the 500 this winter and was amazed at the images I got (I didnīt even set it up, just got it from the rental and shot away). I shoot a lot with the PDW700 (XDcamHD) and DigiBeta cams and the 500 just is used the same but brings a better image IMO. Maybe the 700 has better res, but it lacks the Pana-mojo and it misses variable framerates.

The 300 is a great cam and will sell very well. It is perfect for news/ENG/event/studio work. In Europe it will be the killer 50i cam. Many newsnetworks still love that interlaced newslook.

But for DOF-control, variable framerates, lowlight documentations, 25p Panalook.....the 500 still wins hands down.

Sumfun
04-06-2009, 12:29 PM
The HPX500 is currently the oldest camera in Panasonic's lineup. Maybe we'll see a refresh soon.

Joe Shaw
04-06-2009, 01:29 PM
I think Jan has repeatedly ruled that out.

Noel Evans
04-06-2009, 05:16 PM
Yeah nothing new on the 500 for now, fine by me. Maybe in about 18 months we might see some info start to filter through? But who knows.

alexdias
04-06-2009, 05:27 PM
I have the feeling Panasonic will be showing other new cameras at NAB and the 500 (price level when released that is) is the natural candidate for an upgrade.

Cees Mutsaers
04-07-2009, 11:06 AM
I think that will be way to late. I think there will be an upgrade with new EVF, LCD display ad that would already be very nice



Yeah nothing new on the 500 for now, fine by me. Maybe in about 18 months we might see some info start to filter through? But who knows.

Christian m
04-07-2009, 11:43 AM
I've been looking into the 300/500 recently. The issues with the 500 now are that the 300 offer (on paper at least) better lcd, viewfinder, slot for wireless transmitter and avc-i. But the 500 still got the 2/3" and 4 P2 slots. A 500 with unislot, better lcd/evf and avc-i are needed for the 500 to stay in the market on a longer basis. Then it would fill the hole between the 300 with 1/3" and the 27/3700 better, at least in my world and for Pana it would give Sony even harder competition.

alexdias
04-07-2009, 12:47 PM
There's always been a huge hole between the "prosumer" and pro camera lines.

It's either less than 10K (most of the times w/ lens) or more than 35K (always w/out lens) and with lens you are talking more than 50K.

Actually one of the greatest things about the RED is that you can create a simple package "kind of" in the middle of that price range.

puredrifting
04-07-2009, 12:58 PM
I was on a shoot with an HPX3000 yesterday. The LCD flip out on the 3000 is the same not so clear one that is on all of the other Panasonic cameras, 4x3 aspect ratio, etc.

The LCOS flip out screen on the HPX300 must be seen to be believed. Same with the viewfinder, both are really top of the line. To me, the monitoring system is probably one of the most impressive features on the HPX300. I shot for a week with the HPX300 in harsh sunlight, shade and shadows and the new LCOS flip out screen and the VF were both a dream.

Dan

Cees Mutsaers
04-07-2009, 01:58 PM
As I understand AVC-I is a native 1920*1080 based codec and implement this on the 500 will make the higher end pana cams obsolete and therefore it wil not happen. The only update I can see is the improved evf, lcd and some of the new features we saw already on the HPX170 like playback immedately without switching back to the mode it was recorded in, last clip removal etc. The 500 will stay a 720 HD cam with 2/3 inch ccd's which is good :-)) At lkeast I would buy it immediately when it comes over a HPX300.



I've been looking into the 300/500 recently. The issues with the 500 now are that the 300 offer (on paper at least) better lcd, viewfinder, slot for wireless transmitter and avc-i. But the 500 still got the 2/3" and 4 P2 slots. A 500 with unislot, better lcd/evf and avc-i are needed for the 500 to stay in the market on a longer basis. Then it would fill the hole between the 300 with 1/3" and the 27/3700 better, at least in my world and for Pana it would give Sony even harder competition.

Christian m
04-07-2009, 03:40 PM
As I understand AVC-I is a native 1920*1080 based codec and implement this on the 500 will make the higher end pana cams obsolete and therefore it wil not happen.

The 2700 also are a 720, but I can't see the HPX500 with avc-i being a threat to the far superior 2700 anyway. 500's usually bundles with a decent, but not the best, lenses.

I've been quoted almost(ofcourse some difference there will be, but not more than one or two jobs would cover...) the same price for a 500 kit as for a 300kit. Tempted to go for 500 with ccds as i do everything from actionsport events with possible flashing lights...

Cees Mutsaers
04-10-2009, 04:45 AM
I think that if there will be not an significant improvement of the skew issue on the 300 I will wait for a 500 with improved EVF/LCD since I do not need 1920*1080 native resolution but light sensitivity and to be able to shoot movements is more important to me. I still hope Panna will do some magic at the NAB regarding the 500 :)

Spartacus
04-10-2009, 06:26 AM
Besides cheaper P2, which has been cross quoted around here, a somehow updated 500 (no AVCintra though) is also likely...
The Pana reps said sth like this, when talking about the AVCintra board for the HPX2100:
"The (existing) 500 can not be upgraded with the AVCintra board, there is no option for that" "Ok, so what about an updated 500 then?" "Well, thatīs sth else, hmm, weīll see at NAB..."

dcloud
04-10-2009, 09:41 AM
Im hoping for a hpx170 with the 3mos avcintra and more :)

Cees Mutsaers
04-10-2009, 10:29 AM
That for sure I will not expect to happen !!!


Im hoping for a hpx170 with the 3mos avcintra and more :)

dcloud
04-10-2009, 10:21 PM
why not? seems plausible to have the 3mos on a fixed lens camcorder. its a 1/3" sensor.

puredrifting
04-11-2009, 09:45 AM
I must say that after using the HPX300, all bets are off as far as what Panasonic will come out with. If you would have told me a year ago that Panasonic would come out with a detachable lens AVC Intra full raster camcorder that streets for $7,800.00, I would have told you you were full of s---. I do think that just like DVC Pro HD came from the Varicam all of the way down to the lowly HVX200, I think we will see the exact camera that dcloud is wishing for. I just don't think it will be at NAB, the 170 is way too new.

I see the entire P2 lineup evolving to AVC Intra fairly quickly. It gives Panasonic a big leg up on Sony's crappy and antiquated long GOP codecs and it is the only 10 bit camera codec at the moment. It looks really great too, the footage we are cutting is mixed in with HVX200 and HPX170 footage and the 300 footage just sparkles in comparison.

Dan

Bassman2003
04-11-2009, 11:01 AM
It is a shame the HPX-500 can not be upgraded to AVC-I.

The main beef with P2 cams is recording times. It is in effect a 50% price cut for P2 cards.

Using a different codec from a business point of view is free for Panasonic outside of possibly hurting upper end sales as the lower end gets the good stuff.

But it really would be a face-lift for the P2 line with longer record times and full raster images.

With SDHC & CF cards becoming faster and faster, Both Sony & Panasonic are swimming upstream with memory costs and percieved value.

Cees Mutsaers
04-11-2009, 12:37 PM
How do you know that this is due to the AVC-I ???



,......the footage we are cutting is mixed in with HVX200 and HPX170 footage and the 300 footage just sparkles in comparison.

Dan[/quote]

puredrifting
04-11-2009, 01:09 PM
Cees:

I am sure that it is partially due also to the better lens on the 300 but we shot many different setups with all three cameras and when the editor cuts between the shots, the smoothness in gradiations, superior contrast and better color are obviously largely the result of a better codec. 300 looks noticeably better than the 170 or 200, I would expect it to.

It is similar to when you are editing and juxtapose DVC Pro HD shots between uncompressed HD shots on a mixed format timeline in FCP. While all of the footage can looks good, it becomes fairly simple to tell which shots are uncompressed and which are not, especially in shots with sky or gradiations caused by high contrast.

Dan

Cees Mutsaers
04-11-2009, 02:11 PM
Hi Dan.

That is good to here. Lets just hope that Panna will fix the skew thing to the same level as thye ex series and hopefully tiny a bit better. Do you expect some news from the NAB. Hope there will become more footage available on this forum.

Cees



Cees:

I am sure that it is partially due also to the better lens on the 300 but we shot many different setups with all three cameras and when the editor cuts between the shots, the smoothness in gradiations, superior contrast and better color are obviously largely the result of a better codec. 300 looks noticeably better than the 170 or 200, I would expect it to.

It is similar to when you are editing and juxtapose DVC Pro HD shots between uncompressed HD shots on a mixed format timeline in FCP. While all of the footage can looks good, it becomes fairly simple to tell which shots are uncompressed and which are not, especially in shots with sky or gradiations caused by high contrast.

Dan

puredrifting
04-11-2009, 04:29 PM
Hi Cees:

I am not going to NAB. Knowing Panasonic, they are working on the issue and will disperse the fix as soon as it is done, (assuming they come up with a fix) I doubt if it will tie in with NAB but you never know.

Just so you are aware, the skew as the camera sits right now is MUCH better than the EX1 when shooting 720 24pN but it is much more noticeable than the EX1 when shooting 1080 24p. Typically cameras window down or somehow down convert from their highest resolution to obtain lower raster resolutions so the fact that skewing seems much less perceptible in 720 vs. 1080 24 is strange to me, I cannot figure out the logic. And supposedly it is much better in 1080 60i than in 1080 24p so it must have something to do with shutter scan rates?

Dan

Cees Mutsaers
04-12-2009, 01:20 AM
Why can't they made the shutter scan rate at a multiple of 60 lps like 120 or even better 240. I am not an electronic engineer (just a simple chemist) so I am not sure it is technically possible but I would have expect these skewing problems at such low scan rate !! Isn't there another way to read a CMOS than using a rolling shutter (read at this forum somewhere that even a some expensive cams with CMOS and a global shutter) ?

puredrifting
04-12-2009, 04:00 PM
In order to implement a global shutter on a CMOS imager, the global shutter takes up valuable image gathering surface area on the imager, thereby reducing sensitivity and increasing noise. Both would be a bad idea on a 1/3" imager. On a 1" imager, perhaps not such a big deal.

Or so I have been told. I am far from an engineer but I asked the same question and someone told me this.

Dan

Cees Mutsaers
04-12-2009, 04:37 PM
Hi Dan,

Thanks, this explanation about the global shutter makes sense :-) What about the scan rate, do you think it can be increased by just a firmware update ? My stomach tells me it can only be done by a hardware change but then again I am not into electronics.

puredrifting
04-12-2009, 04:58 PM
I know that RED did it with a software update for the RED One. Different camera, chip and architecture but I really am not sure.

Dan